If you had told Tim Murphy and the rest of the Harvard football family last spring that they’d soon be the subject of a national media blitz digging deep into the heart of the program and highlighting some of its marquee players, they would have been ecstatic.

After all, Murphy had spent the past 12 years resurrecting a struggling program and turning it into the envy of the rest of the country. Crimson football was what college athletics was supposed to be—in between winning games on Saturdays players were just normal students going to class and contributing to the community.

And more than anything, the program was clean. The players stayed out of trouble. Any publicity would surely be positive.

By now you know what actually happened. The captain got arrested and then dismissed from the team. The quarterback was suspended for violating an undisclosed team rule. A wide receiver was kicked off the team for allegedly performing a disrespectful routine at the annual skit night.

The national media have come—unfortunately for the wrong reasons.

The reputation of Harvard football has taken a beating over the past half year. Not because what happened here is any different than what goes on at bigger programs all over the country or because a couple of students made some bad choices. It’s taken a beating because it’s Harvard, and when people have a chance to knock the Crimson down a notch or two, they jump on it.

I am certainly not condoning or defending the actions of any of the players involved in the misconduct, but let’s look at what has really occurred.

Matt Thomas ’06-’07, who was arrested for assault and battery last June, clearly committed the most serious offense. If the allegations against Thomas are true, then there is no logical or defensible reason for what he did. He deserves his punishment, and it is understandable that Harvard football will be guilty by association.

As for the two more recent matters, the suspension of quarterback Liam O’Hagan ’08 and the dismissal of receiver Keegan Toci ’07, the negativity seems a little less warranted.

In both of these circumstances, the players were punished for non-public offenses, meaning that Murphy could have taken the easy way out and never addressed any of it. He could have sat these guys down in a private meeting, told them what they did wrong and never mentioned it again.

Instead, Murphy did exactly what we wish coaches all over the country would do—teach accountability. He punished players and his team not because he had to, but because he felt it was the right thing to do. At a time when it seems education is the last thing on the minds of most college coaches, Murphy chose to be a teacher, even if it cost his team in the standings.

So while everyone else asks what went wrong in the world of Crimson football, I think Murphy’s handling of an unfortunate situation demonstrates the best of Harvard athletics, not the worst.

The players made mistakes, they faced the consequences and hopefully they will learn from their experiences. As Murphy has said repeatedly, 99 percent of the players he’s had here have been of impeccable character.

That ratio seems pretty good to me.

—Staff writer David H. Stearns can be reached at stearns@fas.harvard.edu.